Since property rights are inseparable from the duty to pay tax – both coming from the same source and being indivisible – the right to hold property is equally and exactly matched by the duty to pay tax. So anyone arguing a tax is not legitimate has at the same time to say property rights do not exist or that government is illegitimate. Those are the options. I think that is what is being said. Those….(…)… who seek to justify tax crime and the avoidance of obligations to government seek to undermine the state and the society we live in. we need to be aware that the choices to be made are ultimately as blunt as that. And it is the very essence of society that we are arguing for when we defend the right to tax.

“Since property rights are inseparable from the duty to pay tax – both coming from the same source and being indivisible – the right to hold property is equally and exactly matched by the duty to pay tax. So anyone arguing a tax is not legitimate has at the same time to say property rights do not exist”

The stupidity of this comment can be seen by imagining a 100% tax rate as, from the above, it follows that if one objected to this 100% tax rate then one has thereby undermined one’s own support for property rights. But it doesn’t take a genius to see that if the government can seize everything you own then you don’t really own anything at all, property rights and taxation are not ‘indivisible.’

Even if you accept the ludicrous premise that rights come from government (as opposed merely to being protected by the government), it does not follow that property rights and taxation are indivisible, that two things come from the same source does not mean that they are inseparable. This argument is analogous to the suggestion that ‘since the right to life comes from government, then the government may kill you whenever it chooses and to object to this is, at the same time, to say that rights to life do not exist.’